6 ms·
Yes, AppleInsider is totally biased. But the competition here is not "Open Standards", it's CUDA, which is Nvidia's own proprietary standard. There is no Open
by ogre_codes 7y ago
Yes, AppleInsider is totally biased.
But the competition here is not "Open Standards", it's CUDA, which is Nvidia's own proprietary standard. There is no Open Standard which has any kind of market share.
The claim that Apple is against Open Standards is a bit misleading in this case. Apple invested a lot of money and spent years pushing Open Standards in this market in the form of OpenCL... the open standard which Nvidia refused to support and in general the industry ignored.
Apple is no angel and in many other places they've ignore standards, but in this case, there have been standards around for years and both the competition and the market have largely ignored them. Singling out Apple here is just wrong.
- theossuary 7y agoIsn't Vulkan the open-source specification they're ignoring in favor of their own?
- GeekyBear 7y agoMetal and Mantle were both proprietary frameworks that were in development at the same time. AMD announced the existence of Mantle at their Developer Summit in November 2013. Apple announced Metal at WWDC the following June and shipped it that fall. By the time AMD donated their Mantle code to Khronos to serve as the basis for Vulkan, Apple had already shipped Metal.
- vetinari 7y ago> By the time AMD donated their Mantle code to Khronos to serve as the basis for Vulkan, Apple had already shipped Metal. Metal v1 was so woefully incomplete, AMD was in no position to ship something similarly limited. Vulkan 1.0 is functionally similar to Metal v2, which shipped several months after Vulkan 1.0.
- ogre_codes 7y agoWhen you say "They" do you mean Nvidia, the market, or Apple?
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- bilbo0s 7y agoThey're fighting on the CUDA-OpenCL-MSL layer. They're not really talking about the higher level Vulkan-OpenGL-Metal stuff. So CUDA and OpenCL are the specs being ignored by Apple. My own opinion, everyone should probably just use OpenCL and contribute to it as necessary, but that's not gonna happen.
- pjmlp 7y agoFirst OpenCL needs to make it to use C++, Fortran, Julia, .NET, Java as easy as CUDA.
- ogre_codes 7y agoAgain, Apple invested huge amounts of money and effort into OpenCL with the previous generation of the Mac Pro and got very little adoption. Suggesting Apple is ignoring OpenCL is simply not true. They made a significant effort to make it work and it just didn't pan out. That Apple hasn't invested in Vulkan is a fair criticism, but Vulkan hasn't exactly been grabbing market share either.
- bilbo0s 7y agoVulkan Shading Language as it stands, is likely a non starter, you're right. That explains the lack of adoption. That said, I wasn't advocating to try and beat that particular dead horse. I was advocating for OpenCL. I understand why the Metal Shading Language is superior, but OpenCL is still very good, and works across platforms to boot. CUDA and MSL are really nice. I just wish both NVidia and Apple would add to OpenCL and let the industry move forward with that standard and the ability to use whatever hardware we wanted. Now all that said, I also understand Apple's hesitancy with OpenCL as well. It's definitely one of those "fool me once, shame on you" kind of things.
- GeekyBear 7y agoApple created OpenCL and donated it to Khronos. The point of the trash can Mac Pro, was to use OpenCL to leverage two mid level GPUs as a cheaper and higher performance alternative to one high end and expensive GPU. Developers never really adopted OpenCL, and the whole idea was dropped.